Pan European ecall and TPS ecall data exchange Luca Bergonzi Sales executive EMEA & Asia Beta 80 Group. September 22, 2016

Transcription

1 Pan European ecall and TPS ecall data exchange Luca Bergonzi Sales executive EMEA & Asia Beta 80 Group September 22, 2016

2 Presentation outline Interoperability among PSAPs PSAP models The concept of Incident form The proposed standard: CAP Interaction with TPSPs EN and beyond CAP for TPSPs Unsolved problems

3 Interoperability among PSAPs Emergency call (ecall) Call qualification and location Dispatch Emergency call to 112 Call taker qualifies the call and locates the caller Dispatcher sends the most appropriate type of resources 3

4 PSAP models Model no.1 4

5 PSAP models Model no.2 First level PSAP filters calls ONLY. 5

6 PSAP models Model no.3 First level PSAP filters calls AND gathers initial information. 6

7 PSAP models Model no.4 7

8 PSAP models Model no.5 8

9 The concept of Incident form Incident form Caller number Caller location Call qualification Other data Names Notes Etc. Etc. Etc. 9

10 The concept of Incident form Incident form Caller number Caller location Call qualification Other data Names Notes Etc. MSD Etc. Etc. 10

11 MSD to PSAP to PSAP: today ecall MSD PSAP A Incident form (with MSD) PSAP B Proprietary format or voice The MSD is received by PSAP A Incident form is transmitted to PSAP B Incident form (if existing) is built using a proprietary format this prevents interoperability in multi PSAP cooperation environments each receiving PSAP should know and interpret many different formats 11

12 MSD to PSAP to PSAP: tomorrow ecall MSD PSAP A Incident form (with MSD) PSAP B Standard CAP format The MSD is received by PSAP A Incident form is transmitted to PSAP B Different, proprietary Incident forms are replaced by a common, standard format: CAP interoperability is much easier, as only MSD and CAP knowledge is required future proof solution, thanks to the extensibility and flexibility of the CAP structure 12

13 Interoperability among PSAPs Emergency call (ecall) Call qualification and location Dispatch Proposed solution works well for models no.1, no.2, no.3 Can work for model no.4 Probably not required in model no.5 Works well for cross border scenarios 13

14 Recap of the CAP Structure

15 Mapping and carrying MSD information with CAP: objectives and rationale To design a Pan European, flexible and extensible CAP profile, for exchanging ecall related information between PSAPs, with the following principles: the CAP envelope will contain the information to (i) uniquely identify the messages (ii) link updates to the original alert, and (iii) specify the intended recipient(s) the whole MSD content is carried as a resource, base64 encoded MSD mandatory fields mapped and carried within specific CAP fields, to be immediately accessible even before decoding the whole MSD

16 Mapping and carrying MSD information within CAP: results of the analysis #1 Mapping of mandatory MSD fields 16 out of 18 can be mapped onto CAP fields, in many cases using alert.info.parameter fields MSD version and MSD identifier would be accessible after decoding the CAP MSD resource Mapping of optional and additional MSD fields optional fields (e.g. number of passengers), if used, may be directly mapped to CAP alert.info.parameter fields or not, according to their relevance additional data may be always left for later handling, i.e. after the CAP MSD resource is decoded by the PSAP

17 Mapping and carrying MSD information within CAP: results of the analysis #2 Mandatory CAP fields most of them must be inserted by the sender, while preparing the message for other PSAPs these are the ones containing information about the sender and the intended recipient(s), as well as the sending time of the message other may be compiled using pre defined values or rules this is the case, for example, of alert.info.event and alert.info.category fields Optional CAP fields some of them, like the alert.info.headline, may be built from some information available in the MSD message

18 Points deserving further analysis Do we need to insert the mandatory MSD version and MSD identifier fields directly as CAP fields (e.g. as parameters)? Handling of MSD additional data Check what additional data is commonly used in ecall Do we need to have some of such additional information directly in the CAP message, e.g. as parameters fields? Definition of the exact rules for compiling mandatory CAP fields, such as: alert.info.event, alert.info.category, alert.info.urgency, alert.info.severity, alert.info.certainty

19 Interaction with TPSPs Considerations based on EN 16102

20 Interaction with TPSPs TPSP 1 PSAP 1 TPSP 2 PSAP 2 TPSP 2 PSAP 3

21 EN transitional arrangement: web service pull mechanism EN 16102, page 44, picture B.1 NO STANDARDISED INFORMATION STRUCTURE > NOT SUITABLE FOR MACHINE TO MACHINE INTERACTION TSD information (MSD plus optional data) is published in a web service Availability of new emergency data is notified to the PSAP via voice call PSAP gets access to the web service, using the provided login credentials

22 TPSP to PSAP TSD transfer: proposed approach TSD CAP with MSD And TSD Pull dedicated CAP Feeds (STRUCTURED and STANDARD) Current TPSP System TSD TSD to CAP Adapter CAP WEB Feeds Share INTERNET PSAP The TPSP system is able to generate a TSD, including MSD and other optional data A TSD to CAP Adapter (part of the TPSP system or outside of it) converts TSD into a CAP, including MSD and TSD information (see previous slides) A CAP Web Feed Share (on each TPSP) will be able to: identify the relevant PSAP for the emergency message, based on registered rules publish the CAP messages in a structured format, in dedicated and protected Web Feeds, one for each registered PSAP authority Web Feeds of CAP messages will be pulled by the PSAPs Having the information in a structured format (Web Feed) and not as unstructured Web pages, will enable machine to machine communication and data handling 22

23 TPSP Set of Data (TSD): current reference XML representation according to EN XML Schema Definition (XSD) of the TSD message Includes: TPS ecall UID and TPS ecall SID fields TPS callback number and Vehicle phone number fields reference to the XSD of the enclosed MSD message, according to the EN reference to an additional XSD, describing the way of including Additional Information The proposed Additional Information structure for TSD contains more than 50 XML fields no one of these fields is mandatory

24 Mapping and carrying TSD information with CAP: rationale and objectives Consider the former proposal for MSD mapping with CAP, for PSAP to PSAP communication Design a Pan European, flexible and extensible ecall CAP profile, used both for PSAP to PSAP and for TPSP to PSAP communication PSAPs need to understand and manage the same data format (CAP) in both cases the CAP envelope will contain information to (i) uniquely identify the messages (ii) link updates to the original alert, and (iii) specify the intended recipient(s) for each of the different communication chains (TPSP to PSAP and PSAP to PSAP) the whole TSD message, including the Additional Information (only in TPSP to PSAP)andthe whole MSD message (also in PSAP to PSAP) are carried as CAP resource blocks, each of them base64 encoded most relevant MSD information (e.g. mandatory fields), mapped and carried within specific CAP fields, in order to be immediately and easily accessible even before decoding the whole MSD (PSAP side) most relevant TSD information (UID, SID, Callback Number and Vehicle Phone Number), carried as additional CAP parameter blocks, to be immediately accessible (PSAP side) most relevant or common TSD Additional Information, if identified, can be easily added as additional CAP parameter blocks, as well

25 Interaction with TPSPs TPSP 1 PSAP 1 TPSP 2 PSAP 2 TPSP 2 PSAP 3

26 Interaction with TPSPs TPSP 1 PSAP 1 TPSP 2 PSAP 2 TPSP 2 PSAP 3

27 Points deserving further analysis in TPSP to PSAP communication Rules / differences in compiling mandatory CAP fields, in TSPS to PSAP and PSAP to PSAP communication, such as: alert.info.event, alert.info.category, alert.info.urgency, alert.info.severity, alert.info.certainty Concept for creating a registry of communicating TPSP and PSAP authorities, and for the definition of the addressing rules ownerships and maintenance issues Missing common PSAP E164 phone database registry

28 The floor is open for discussion Contact details: Luca Bergonzi Beta 80 Group luca.bergonzi@beta80group.it Phone :